If you're unsure what to do, just be nice. I may not agree with your POV, but I'll give it my best shot to be kind. Sure, there could be exceptions, but how can you go wrong when you lead with love?
I just cant inhabit the headspace of anyone that thinks calling someone their name is an endorsement of all their lifestyle choices
I think I agree with your perspective to an extent. I don't think teachers should use their positions to push their partisan talking points or push their religious views (or atheist views either) on students. I also appreciate your acknowledging that you lean right. I lean left, especially on social issues, and I'm sure we're all influenced by our own views when discussing a particular issue in public schools. I ask myself, who gets to decide? The teacher? The student? The parents? The school board? The Superintendent? The Governor? Do we have to always be consistent? Not sure I have a universal rule for that generally, but perhaps that's a cop out on my part. My humble analysis here is that I think there's some possible tension between saying teachers should be "mentoring children to make them productive members of society" and the belief that teachers should essentially stick to teaching their assigned subject. Personally, I think a strong case can be made that a teacher promoting LGBT tolerance/acceptance is part of mentoring students and making students respectful and productive members of society. I think that also aligns with anti-discrimination goals and laws generally - whereas a teacher's religious opposition to same sex marriage or transitioning is, to me, not much different than a teacher who thinks it's morally wrong to eat pork. Of course, age appropriateness is always a fair discussion when it comes to K-12, but that's another issue IMO given that there's nothing inherently age inappropriate about gender or pronouns or even the fact that some people have two moms, etc.
Good first sentence - I agree. Also agree with the second sentence. You lose me on the third. Imagine teaching Shakespeare, poetry, Dahli, or Led Zeppelin w/o teacher or student self-expression.
It also sounds like the prior poster has some serious issues. Unfortunately, these heartless human beings vote.
Anyone else out there just not care much at all about what other people choose to do with their bodies or call themselves? It’s just not my business, and all I can do is be polite and respectful of their wishes like any other, even if some of it feels a bit icky.
I had a girl on a team I coached this year want to be called a different name than her given name. I just called her that name. I don’t care either way. Just show up and participate.
Every social movement in this country to give rights or respect to those with less freedoms (women, blacks, minorities, gays), has been met with resistance by conservatives. It is a zero sum game for them. “Religious Liberty” in these cases is just a disingenuous way around it through a biased conservative court.
Yep. Wondering if anyone else thought about that with the title. The Forgotten Battle on Netflix is excellent as well - recent Dutch production
You are referring to these people as mentally ill, and in a prior post, you referred to them as deviant. I would guess that you would characterize the 20 million or so LGBTQ people in this country the same way. I wouldn’t characterize these people like that although the struggles that they go through can cause depression and suicidal thoughts. On the other side of the coin, I consider the compassionless people who view LGBTQ people as deviant and mentally ill to be themselves deviant and mentally ill.
Great catch 108. It's encouraging that others on the board see the plain facts that are in front of their face. While I have MANY beefs with Democrats and Liberals on a variety of issues, one must be an uneducated moron not to simply look at the facts. The facts are: Capatalism is built on greed. Capatalism is over-whelmingly controled by Conservative, Republican, Caucasians. Their mantra: I got mine, I deserve it and I don't give a shit about fair play, decency, morality, or basic human rights. Push persons of a less concentrated caucasian gene pool into ghetto's, the gutter or the prison system. (See the "Real-Estate" and "Judicial" System) Incarcerate them by the millions. Create a legal system and language that is impossible to negotiate without a suitcase full of "Do-Ray-Me" to pay a "caucasian" law firm to "keep you out". Charge them userous rates for a loan or don't provide it period. Put them in jail. Allow drugs to permeate their communities. Tear down legal presidents to help the few minorities, that with a helping hand, can make it to college, back out into the streets. Our entire American system is composed of completely narcisstic, corporate contolled, lunatics, that would destroy the environment, ruin the air and water we breath and drink, to push unadulterated consumption and economic growth at the expense of our very existence. Republicans that worship this mantra under the veil of christianity better pray to their cultish god to save them. Better get those fusion reactors running right quick. A hellish world full of murder and mayhem is just around the corner, waiting for you. I will not thank you for the upcoming "Dante's Inferno" which YOU created.
You are bringing up an entirely different, extremely sensitive issue, which is whether it is morally wrong to eat pork. I have no doubt that if the Lord was aware way back when about how good roast pork, yellow, rice, and black beans taste, or how good barbecue tastes, or how great bacon is, he would’ve blessed the eating of pork. On the other hand, I believe that he would have still put the kibosh on eating ham.
